MADISON - OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma is reaching a settlement with more than 20 states — but not Wisconsin, where Democrats and Republicans are in a political brawl over how to resolve lawsuits.

Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul called the tentative settlement with other states inadequate. But for now, the Democratic attorney general couldn't finalize a deal with the pharmaceutical giant even if he wanted because of his disagreement with Republican state lawmakers.

Republicans contend Kaul is the one holding up the ability to reach settlements.

Until Wednesday, Kaul and his aides would not say the Purdue case was part of the dispute. That changed when other states reached the tentative agreement with the company, Kaul spokeswoman Gillian Drummond said.

Attorneys for about 2,000 local governments said Wednesday they had agreed to a tentative settlement with the Stamford, Connecticut-based company over the nation's opioid crisis. More than 20 states are among the governments involved.

Under the agreement, Purdue will pay up to $12 billion and the Sackler family that owns the company will give up control of the firm.

But Kaul and his counterparts in some states oppose the deal, saying the company needs to pay more.

“The Sackler family has made billions of dollars from the sale of opioids," Kaul said in a statement. "Wisconsin has alleged that two Purdue Pharma entities and Richard Sackler contributed to the opioid epidemic through unlawful conduct. We’re committed to getting justice and, in my view, Purdue’s current position doesn’t achieve that.”

Milwaukee County has also sued Purdue, but it was not immediately clear if the county was among those agreeing to the settlement with Purdue.

Kaul sued Purdue and the Sackler family in Dane County Circuit Court in May. Like other attorneys general, Kaul argues the company engaged in deceptive practices that fueled an addiction epidemic.

In August, Kaul sought to present a potential settlement to the Legislature's Joint Finance Committee but wouldn't provide details on it because committee members refused to sign nondisclosure agreements that he said were needed.

GOP lawmakers did not say whether they thought Wisconsin should sign onto the settlement, but they argued Kaul should have shared information with them about the case long ago.

They criticized him for publicly discussing his views on the Purdue case Wednesday after saying for weeks he could not say whether he wanted to present a potential settlement in that case to the finance committee.

"It's clear the attorney general did not need signed secrecy agreements to share case information. ... The attorney general should stop playing games, follow the law and work with the Joint Committee on Finance," said a statement from the GOP leaders of the committee, Sen. Alberta Darling of River Hills and John Nygren of Marinette.

Republican lawmakers approved lame-duck laws in December after Kaul and Democratic Gov. Tony Evers won their elections but before they were sworn in. The laws limited the Democrats' authority and gave Republicans who control the Legislature more oversight of court cases handled by the attorney general.

Kaul and lawmakers cannot agree on which legal settlements are subject to the lame-duck laws. And Kaul has insisted legislators must sign secrecy pledges that lawmakers from both parties have said they would not sign.

Republican lawmakers last month sued Kaul over how he is handling settlements. The state Supreme Court is weighing whether to accept that lawsuit.

Lawmakers and the public at the time didn't know what case was to be considered. Part of the meeting was closed to the public and lawmakers didn't learn what case was at issue because they wouldn't sign the nondisclosure agreements.

Republican lawmakers planned to take up run-of-the-mill cases a week later but abandoned the idea when they couldn't agree with Kaul on how to proceed. They remain at odds over how to review and approve cases.

Phillips signed a nondisclosure agreement, and Republicans argued that should provide Kaul with the assurances he needs that information will remain confidential. But Kaul and the head of the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau determined the agreement Phillips signed didn't prevent members of the committee from publicly discussing the settlements.